I always find it fun that her husband, Percy Bysshe Shelley, was widely regarded as one of the greatest writers of his time, but it’s Mary Shelley who is still a household name more than two centuries later.
dfmz on
This isn’t necessarily the result of misogyny, but rather ignorance or incompetence.
Both can look like malevolence (or misogyny, in this case) and are far more common.
MAUROKE01 on
i fw with mary shelley heavy
Wise-Juggernaut-8285 on
This is because they often classify Frankenstein as a gothic horror novel not scifi.
, i had her novel on three reading lists in 4 years of university and its a great story … i feel like she gets her due but who can say?
zam_aeternam on
For me Frankstein is not science-fiction it is more fantastic. One could argue that there is some emphasis in the book on how they resuscitate the creature and it is not “magic” but ultimately if you include Frankstein in science fiction you have to include much older tales like Arabian night. Cyrano de Bergerac (the true guy not the character) wrote novel about empire on the moon in the 17th century. Keepler also to illustrate his point on moon-earth observation.
Do not get blinded by politic. The work of M.Shelley is huge but you do not have to consider it as science-fiction.
earthforce_1 on
There are some much, much earlier stories from various cultures that could be considered science fiction.
Does the work of Mary Shelley count as science fiction? Misogyny bad and all, but is it science fiction or more akin to star wars, a fantasy type book with science elements? I was under the impression that Frankenstein was part of the horror genre.
EmeraldDream123 on
There is a tradition of erasing Mary Shelley? Well whoever is trying to erase her is doing a pretty bad job.
I’d classify Frankenstein more as horror than science fiction. It originated from a scary story competition among friends, which sets a clear tone. While you could argue it has sci-fi elements, like the use of fantastical science and a scientist, that feels like a bit of a reach. As for Edgar Allan Poe, he wasn’t a sci-fi writer, so I’m not sure why he’s being mentioned in this context at all.
Lokenlives4now on
More horror than science fiction but amazing nonetheless still holds up to this day
binneysaurass on
There is a huge misunderstanding of what comprises the genre of science fiction in literature and film.
Frankenstein isn’t science fiction.
Star Wars isn’t science fiction.
I don’t recall Poe ever writing anything even close, so why he’s mentioned I have no idea.
Kapitano72 on
Arguments of which story was the “first” of a genre are always pointless. There are always precursors, and genre boundaries always elastic.
SooperFunk on
“Dear reddit
Women don’t belong in science fiction unless they’re in spandex, wearing a short skirt or something slutty.
Yours sincerely
Nerds”
fr0z3nf1r3 on
The bible had a bunch of male authors who predated all of them but hey what do I know
Captain_Sterling on
I remember reading when I was a kid that Platos timaeus and critics could be considered the first science fiction since it dealt with atlantis.
What belongs to what genre can be subjective. I’d say Frankenstein could be sci-fi/horror. And it’s probably the first work in that genre to be popular. (sorry, I’m not using definites and I’m just saying probably. It’s always possible there’s some other author who released a story none of us have ever heard of).
gregaustex on
I know who she is 200 years later, and her book is considered a great piece of historic literature and required reading for most students, so “erase” seems a bit hyperbolic. Seems she is being denied one possible accolade but retains her greatest one.
If you think about it Frankenstein easily qualifies as a sci-fi story, but it definitely feels more like a horror/monster story lumped in with Dracula and mummies, and I think is popularly viewed as such. Her “The Last Man” similarly may also qualify but also maybe isn’t quite clearly sci-fi as we know it today, though in my opinion is maybe more sci-fi than Frankenstein, just wasn’t very popular.
Define “first sci-fi”? First story ever written in human history that would be classified into the genre as we define it today? first such story to be popular? in the West? or first story that established the genre as we know it today?
For a hundred years after Frankenstein there was no genre known as “Science Fiction”. Shelley did not seem to see herself as a writer of speculative fiction where the common theme was how technological advancement could create new universes and circumstances to set the scene for the story. Gernsback really established the genre with his “Amazing Stories” magazine, and I believe he coined the term. Wells was a prolific sci-fi writer who contributed more to establishing and fleshing out the genre as a thing.
I would credit her as the first modern western sci-fi writer to reach a wide audience, but others not doing so doesn’t seem gender based.
dfeidt40 on
Could just be they consider Frankenstein a horror instead of sci-fi. By THEY, I mean the people who wrote this buzzfeed-esque article which is considered journalism now.
Strange-Mouse-8710 on
Lucian of Samosata, a Greek satirist and author, wrote True History in the 2nd century AD. This work is often considered one of the earliest examples of science fiction, even integrating space travel.
Also i am pretty sure that Mary Shelley wrote the story as a horror story, if i am not mistaken she wrote it after being challenged by Lord Byron to write a horror story. But he also challenged the other people who where with him to write a scary story, and Mary Shelley was the one that wrote the scariest story.
Frankenstein is more a horror novel with science fiction elements in it.
Also Mary Shelley wrote Frankenstein in 1816 but it was first published in 1818.
morbid333 on
Frankenstein is science fiction? I thought it was Gothic Horror.
heybigbuddy on
I am surprised at the people in this thread saying Frankenstein can’t or shouldn’t be considered science fiction. The book is built in large part around a character openly ruminating at length about the meaning and value and limits of science and medicine. One of the central questions is whether what science creates can be considered life or alive. I can hardly think of a novel *more* concerned with questions of science than Frankenstein. Sure, it’s still gothic horror, but if you remove the science from Frankenstein there isn’t a hell of a lot left.
pizoisoned on
Frankenstein was one of the first (if not the first) story to blend science and fantasy together in a story. It’s hard to judge that by modern definitions of science fiction. It pushed the boundaries of fiction at the time, and that push opened new possibilities for later authors to go even further. It’s an important work, whether you consider it the first science fiction story or not.
Xolitoburrito on
I feel like the NYTs is just fucking with me at this point. Have they been acquired by Fox? WT actual F is going on there?
KojiroHeracles on
I personally consider whoever wrote The Epic of Gilgamesh to be the first sci-fi author
Own_Instance_357 on
I don’t know who they’re hiring at the Times anymore. I just rarely even look at it anymore because I won’t do the paywall for stuff that’s so off these days vs. the journalism even 10 years ago.
Red_Xen on
True History by Lucian of Samosata includes travelling to the moon and a war between the people of the Moon & the people of the Sun. That’s pretty Sci-Fi.
It was written sometime in the 2nd century AD, which predates Shelley, Verne, Wells and anyone else you care to mention.
Kemel90 on
i dont think i could call frankenstein science fiction tho, i mean, it has “science” and is fiction… but… just nah.
Dagordae on
Yeah, Frankenstein being the first science fiction novel is in no way definite. Lots of argument on what is the first science fiction, she’s merely one candidate among dozens. Including those who predate her by centuries. The debate primarily revolves around what constitutes ‘Science Fiction’, which is a whole mess in itself.
Frankenstein is only arguably science fiction, the science part is glossed over hard and is ancillary to the plot. The movies make it a much bigger deal than the book, which is relegated to a handful of pages and ‘mysterious chemicals’ before switch focus completely to classic gothic horror and human nature. With Verne’s works the science is up front and central, the entire work utter revolves around it. With Frankenstein it’s a setup for gender inverted maternity fears, there’s very little science(Contemporary or speculative) involved, it’s glossed over fairly quickly and perfunctorily.
Verne is widely considered the father of science fiction because his works are inarguably science fiction and his works shaped and still shape the entire genre. Shelley’s primary influence is Gothic Horror, that’s the genre she shaped. Later science fiction only crib Frankenstein in the most surface level and then usually from the horror side. Hell, most Frankenstein works focus FAR more on the science and implications of the science than the original.
pongmoy on
Unless they described historical events, the Sumerian poems from 2100 BC that formed the origins of the Epic of Gilgamesh predate them all.
IronTalon8212010 on
Wait? When was the Bible written? Seriously though, she does deserve more respect I’m sure, but who knows that she didn’t read a short story that inspired her, but it’s lost to history.
Enigma-exe on
They’re both wrong, Kepler’s “Somnium” (circa 1610) is the first science fiction work
OutrageousMight457 on
The late Brian Aldiss gave due recognition to Mary Shelley in his book Billion (later Trillion) Year Spree.
ChamberOfSolidDudes on
Well TIL, and I will not let this shit slide in my numerous daily conversations about scifi with random trees and shrubs
tacocat63 on
I’ve never heard it described as science fiction.
I thought she wrote the first horror fiction novel.
ZombieZekeComic on
The post is about inventing the “genre” though. Frankenstein is great, but doesn’t really focus on the science part, and is also one book. Jules Verne wrote multiple novels about science, machines and fantastic journeys, which constitutes “inventing” a genre.
Training-Ear-614 on
So we are just going to ignore “the year 2440” that was published in 1771?
Training-Ear-614 on
I like how OP just comes throwing misogyny out there over confusion regarding the first science fiction novel. This is debatable as…
A. Frankenstein is classified as horror
B. There are earlier non American science fiction novels written before Frankenstein.
I_Framed_OJ on
Mary Shelley didn’t invent the genre of Science Fiction, and Frankenstein is considered an incredibly important work that is still taught in university classes to this day. Shelley’s parents, Mary Wollestonecraft and William Godwin, were early feminists, and Frankenstein can be interpreted as a feminist critique of science without morality. The films often depict the reanimation of the creature as involving lightning and electricity, but the process is never mentioned in the novel. Shelley doesn’t really address the science behind reanimation, and her novel is not strictly science fiction but a gothic horror story, so it’s not as if she’s being ”cancelled” by the patriarchy.
AMonitorDarkly on
The novel was a lot less “science-y” than the movies were. Because of the movies, the general public conjures up visions of a huge lab with Bunsen burners, test tubes and electrical conductors when they think of Frankenstein. The book is more gothic horror focused.
39 Comments
I always find it fun that her husband, Percy Bysshe Shelley, was widely regarded as one of the greatest writers of his time, but it’s Mary Shelley who is still a household name more than two centuries later.
This isn’t necessarily the result of misogyny, but rather ignorance or incompetence.
Both can look like malevolence (or misogyny, in this case) and are far more common.
i fw with mary shelley heavy
This is because they often classify Frankenstein as a gothic horror novel not scifi.
, i had her novel on three reading lists in 4 years of university and its a great story … i feel like she gets her due but who can say?
For me Frankstein is not science-fiction it is more fantastic. One could argue that there is some emphasis in the book on how they resuscitate the creature and it is not “magic” but ultimately if you include Frankstein in science fiction you have to include much older tales like Arabian night. Cyrano de Bergerac (the true guy not the character) wrote novel about empire on the moon in the 17th century. Keepler also to illustrate his point on moon-earth observation.
Do not get blinded by politic. The work of M.Shelley is huge but you do not have to consider it as science-fiction.
There are some much, much earlier stories from various cultures that could be considered science fiction.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_science_fiction](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_science_fiction)
Does the work of Mary Shelley count as science fiction? Misogyny bad and all, but is it science fiction or more akin to star wars, a fantasy type book with science elements? I was under the impression that Frankenstein was part of the horror genre.
There is a tradition of erasing Mary Shelley? Well whoever is trying to erase her is doing a pretty bad job.
Let’s go with Lucian, 2nd century AD [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_True_Story](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_True_Story)
I’d classify Frankenstein more as horror than science fiction. It originated from a scary story competition among friends, which sets a clear tone. While you could argue it has sci-fi elements, like the use of fantastical science and a scientist, that feels like a bit of a reach. As for Edgar Allan Poe, he wasn’t a sci-fi writer, so I’m not sure why he’s being mentioned in this context at all.
More horror than science fiction but amazing nonetheless still holds up to this day
There is a huge misunderstanding of what comprises the genre of science fiction in literature and film.
Frankenstein isn’t science fiction.
Star Wars isn’t science fiction.
I don’t recall Poe ever writing anything even close, so why he’s mentioned I have no idea.
Arguments of which story was the “first” of a genre are always pointless. There are always precursors, and genre boundaries always elastic.
“Dear reddit
Women don’t belong in science fiction unless they’re in spandex, wearing a short skirt or something slutty.
Yours sincerely
Nerds”
The bible had a bunch of male authors who predated all of them but hey what do I know
I remember reading when I was a kid that Platos timaeus and critics could be considered the first science fiction since it dealt with atlantis.
What belongs to what genre can be subjective. I’d say Frankenstein could be sci-fi/horror. And it’s probably the first work in that genre to be popular. (sorry, I’m not using definites and I’m just saying probably. It’s always possible there’s some other author who released a story none of us have ever heard of).
I know who she is 200 years later, and her book is considered a great piece of historic literature and required reading for most students, so “erase” seems a bit hyperbolic. Seems she is being denied one possible accolade but retains her greatest one.
If you think about it Frankenstein easily qualifies as a sci-fi story, but it definitely feels more like a horror/monster story lumped in with Dracula and mummies, and I think is popularly viewed as such. Her “The Last Man” similarly may also qualify but also maybe isn’t quite clearly sci-fi as we know it today, though in my opinion is maybe more sci-fi than Frankenstein, just wasn’t very popular.
Define “first sci-fi”? First story ever written in human history that would be classified into the genre as we define it today? first such story to be popular? in the West? or first story that established the genre as we know it today?
For a hundred years after Frankenstein there was no genre known as “Science Fiction”. Shelley did not seem to see herself as a writer of speculative fiction where the common theme was how technological advancement could create new universes and circumstances to set the scene for the story. Gernsback really established the genre with his “Amazing Stories” magazine, and I believe he coined the term. Wells was a prolific sci-fi writer who contributed more to establishing and fleshing out the genre as a thing.
I would credit her as the first modern western sci-fi writer to reach a wide audience, but others not doing so doesn’t seem gender based.
Could just be they consider Frankenstein a horror instead of sci-fi. By THEY, I mean the people who wrote this buzzfeed-esque article which is considered journalism now.
Lucian of Samosata, a Greek satirist and author, wrote True History in the 2nd century AD. This work is often considered one of the earliest examples of science fiction, even integrating space travel.
Also i am pretty sure that Mary Shelley wrote the story as a horror story, if i am not mistaken she wrote it after being challenged by Lord Byron to write a horror story. But he also challenged the other people who where with him to write a scary story, and Mary Shelley was the one that wrote the scariest story.
Frankenstein is more a horror novel with science fiction elements in it.
Also Mary Shelley wrote Frankenstein in 1816 but it was first published in 1818.
Frankenstein is science fiction? I thought it was Gothic Horror.
I am surprised at the people in this thread saying Frankenstein can’t or shouldn’t be considered science fiction. The book is built in large part around a character openly ruminating at length about the meaning and value and limits of science and medicine. One of the central questions is whether what science creates can be considered life or alive. I can hardly think of a novel *more* concerned with questions of science than Frankenstein. Sure, it’s still gothic horror, but if you remove the science from Frankenstein there isn’t a hell of a lot left.
Frankenstein was one of the first (if not the first) story to blend science and fantasy together in a story. It’s hard to judge that by modern definitions of science fiction. It pushed the boundaries of fiction at the time, and that push opened new possibilities for later authors to go even further. It’s an important work, whether you consider it the first science fiction story or not.
I feel like the NYTs is just fucking with me at this point. Have they been acquired by Fox? WT actual F is going on there?
I personally consider whoever wrote The Epic of Gilgamesh to be the first sci-fi author
I don’t know who they’re hiring at the Times anymore. I just rarely even look at it anymore because I won’t do the paywall for stuff that’s so off these days vs. the journalism even 10 years ago.
True History by Lucian of Samosata includes travelling to the moon and a war between the people of the Moon & the people of the Sun. That’s pretty Sci-Fi.
It was written sometime in the 2nd century AD, which predates Shelley, Verne, Wells and anyone else you care to mention.
i dont think i could call frankenstein science fiction tho, i mean, it has “science” and is fiction… but… just nah.
Yeah, Frankenstein being the first science fiction novel is in no way definite. Lots of argument on what is the first science fiction, she’s merely one candidate among dozens. Including those who predate her by centuries. The debate primarily revolves around what constitutes ‘Science Fiction’, which is a whole mess in itself.
Frankenstein is only arguably science fiction, the science part is glossed over hard and is ancillary to the plot. The movies make it a much bigger deal than the book, which is relegated to a handful of pages and ‘mysterious chemicals’ before switch focus completely to classic gothic horror and human nature. With Verne’s works the science is up front and central, the entire work utter revolves around it. With Frankenstein it’s a setup for gender inverted maternity fears, there’s very little science(Contemporary or speculative) involved, it’s glossed over fairly quickly and perfunctorily.
Verne is widely considered the father of science fiction because his works are inarguably science fiction and his works shaped and still shape the entire genre. Shelley’s primary influence is Gothic Horror, that’s the genre she shaped. Later science fiction only crib Frankenstein in the most surface level and then usually from the horror side. Hell, most Frankenstein works focus FAR more on the science and implications of the science than the original.
Unless they described historical events, the Sumerian poems from 2100 BC that formed the origins of the Epic of Gilgamesh predate them all.
Wait? When was the Bible written? Seriously though, she does deserve more respect I’m sure, but who knows that she didn’t read a short story that inspired her, but it’s lost to history.
They’re both wrong, Kepler’s “Somnium” (circa 1610) is the first science fiction work
The late Brian Aldiss gave due recognition to Mary Shelley in his book Billion (later Trillion) Year Spree.
Well TIL, and I will not let this shit slide in my numerous daily conversations about scifi with random trees and shrubs
I’ve never heard it described as science fiction.
I thought she wrote the first horror fiction novel.
The post is about inventing the “genre” though. Frankenstein is great, but doesn’t really focus on the science part, and is also one book. Jules Verne wrote multiple novels about science, machines and fantastic journeys, which constitutes “inventing” a genre.
So we are just going to ignore “the year 2440” that was published in 1771?
I like how OP just comes throwing misogyny out there over confusion regarding the first science fiction novel. This is debatable as…
A. Frankenstein is classified as horror
B. There are earlier non American science fiction novels written before Frankenstein.
Mary Shelley didn’t invent the genre of Science Fiction, and Frankenstein is considered an incredibly important work that is still taught in university classes to this day. Shelley’s parents, Mary Wollestonecraft and William Godwin, were early feminists, and Frankenstein can be interpreted as a feminist critique of science without morality. The films often depict the reanimation of the creature as involving lightning and electricity, but the process is never mentioned in the novel. Shelley doesn’t really address the science behind reanimation, and her novel is not strictly science fiction but a gothic horror story, so it’s not as if she’s being ”cancelled” by the patriarchy.
The novel was a lot less “science-y” than the movies were. Because of the movies, the general public conjures up visions of a huge lab with Bunsen burners, test tubes and electrical conductors when they think of Frankenstein. The book is more gothic horror focused.